Charles — Apocrypha & Pseudepigrapha Vol. I — Section 587
The reading, its source, and a dependable way back.
Work: The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament — Vol. I
Permanent passage identifier
hsu_2e325450-614f-4b1d-b91f-cbfc88483d76This identity belongs to this edition’s reading. Cross-witness correspondence awaits review.
R. H. Charles ed. 1913, Vol. I
Excerpt · the full reading remains in Scripture Library.
the Greek, the Vulgate presents the appearance of a paraphrastic recension. On the other hand, — apart from these material differences, it often follows VL closely even in diction (cf. cap. 16), and the resemblance throughout is sufficient to show that Jerome used MSS. of the VL, which he merely adapted and corrected, as he considered, by the help of his ‘Chaldee’ text. It is evident from his own remarks (‘huic unam lucubratiunculam dedi, magis sensum e sensu, quam ex verbo verbum transferens’) that he spent very little time or trouble on it, and for this reason its style is less like Je…
- Source
- R. H. Charles, ed., 1913 — Internet Archive
- Rights
- Public-domain-era 1913 edition; unrestricted Internet Archive derivative required
- Reading language
- English
- Completeness
- Not established for this edition
- Review
- Review status not established by this card
Work translation availability: HSLT — No published edition · HSRT — No published edition. A translation of this Work may not cover this exact passage.
Evidence Intelligence
Know what kind of evidence you are looking at.
Helpful Saints keeps direct biblical text, language evidence, ancient witnesses, historical context, research models, and open questions visibly distinct.Direct Biblical Text
The explicit wording and literary context of canonical Scripture.
Original-Language Evidence
Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek, morphology, lemmas, semantic range, and textual comparison.
Ancient Witness
Septuagint, Dead Sea Scrolls, ancient Jewish literature, and early Christian writings—clearly classified.
Historical Context
Geography, material culture, chronology ranges, institutions, customs, and reception history.
Research Model
A configured chronology, theological synthesis, typological pattern, or proposed relationship.
Open Question
Evidence is incomplete, debated, or insufficient for a settled conclusion.